From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Guzman Lugo, Fernando" Subject: RE: [PATCH B 3/3] tidspbridge: decreate timeout to a saner value Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 16:19:27 -0500 Message-ID: <496565EC904933469F292DDA3F1663E60287D62895@dlee06.ent.ti.com> References: <1237339605-20697-1-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> <1237339605-20697-2-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> <1237339605-20697-3-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> <1237339605-20697-4-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> <496565EC904933469F292DDA3F1663E60287D6286E@dlee06.ent.ti.com> <94a0d4530903191404y14b5331eoaccb3f11c1846f9d@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from devils.ext.ti.com ([198.47.26.153]:38192 "EHLO devils.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757707AbZCSVTk convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Mar 2009 17:19:40 -0400 In-Reply-To: <94a0d4530903191404y14b5331eoaccb3f11c1846f9d@mail.gmail.com> Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Felipe Contreras Cc: "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "Kanigeri, Hari" , Hiroshi DOYU , Ameya Palande , Felipe Contreras Yes, I applied this; in fact I have applied all the patches. If I incre= ase the timeout there are no problems. The test I run creates 4 process= and each one does several a lot of calls to InputChnl and OutputChnl, = so I think this test is using the mailbox a lot and would be better a b= igger timeout. What do you think? Regards, =46ernando. -----Original Message----- =46rom: Felipe Contreras [mailto:felipe.contreras@gmail.com]=20 Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 3:04 PM To: Guzman Lugo, Fernando Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org; Kanigeri, Hari; Hiroshi DOYU; Ameya Pal= ande; Felipe Contreras Subject: Re: [PATCH B 3/3] tidspbridge: decreate timeout to a saner val= ue On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 10:42 PM, Guzman Lugo, Fernando wrote: > > > Hi Felipe, > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0I am seeing with this patch because of the timeout: > > DSP device detected !! > DSPProcessor_Attach succeeded. > dspbridge: timed out waiting for mailbox > dspbridge: timed out waiting for mailbox > dspbridge: timed out waiting for mailbox > dspbridge: timed out waiting for mailbox > dspbridge: timed out waiting for mailbox > dspbridge: timed out waiting for mailbox > dspbridge: timed out waiting for mailbox > dspbridge: timed out waiting for mailbox > dspbridge: timed out waiting for mailbox > dspbridge: timed out waiting for mailbox > dspbridge: timed out waiting for mailbox > ... > > Did you see any issue when you change to 1ms? Maybe we can use a bigg= er timeout. Did you apply patch #1 of the B series? I didn't see any timeout on my tests. --=20 =46elipe Contreras -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html